posted at 4:41 pm on October 11, 2013 by Allahpundit

Just in case you missed it in July and are coming late to the news: HHS announced three months ago that, for the next year, ObamaCare enrollees will be more or less on the honor system in reporting their income for subsidies purposes. If you make $50,000 and aren’t happy with the amount of subsidies you’re getting for your new insurance, good news — no one’s going to check too closely if you decide to pencil in $25,000 as your annual income instead. In other words, they’re trusting the public not to steal. The Healthcare.gov trainwreck and the one-year delay of the employer mandate have gotten plenty of ink but the fact that Obama’s basically inviting people to cheat for the next 12 months because his new health-care bureaucracy doesn’t have its act together well enough to police fraud is more revealing of the administration’s incompetence and corruption than either of those. And now, as an eleventh-hour negotiation demand, Senate Republicans are going to try to make him pay for it.

America 2013: Where the president’s willingness not to let people massively defraud his new health-care program is something to be bargained over. May the glorious Hopenchange legacy last a thousand years.

Now, Senate Republicans are putting another Obamacare measure on the table as part of negotiations to fund the government and raise the debt ceiling: Requiring the government to verify the eligibility of Obamacare applicants before they receive subsidies…

The No Subsidies Without Verification Act was passed by the House in September, but it has not been part of the shutdown showdown until now.

“Medicare and Medicaid are already fraught with fraud. I don’t think we want to start Obamacare even worse by not even attempting to verify incomes,” Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD. Johnson says he would like to see an end to Congress’s special treatment or the anti-fraud measure “attached to any increase to the debt ceiling or any continuing resolution agreement.”

Jay Cost writes in the Standard today that it’s time for the GOP to either fight or quit this whole shutdown business, as there’s simply no middle ground. I don’t know; this particular proposal feels like middle ground. Unlike the nascent House plan, it does demand that Obama concede something on ObamaCare that’s valuable to him — not a defunding or a delay but a provision which his Keystone Kops Healthcare.gov team might simply not yet have the manpower or sophistication to enforce. And yet how could he say no, especially if the anti-fraud demand becomes key to negotiations and reporters start paying attention to it? It’s politically radioactive for the president to insist on blocking anti-fraud measures when the whole country’s watching; and yet, if he agrees to it, the logistical load on an HHS bureaucracy that’s already struggling to keep the websites running might further bog the program down in delays and turn people against it. The messaging for the GOP couldn’t be easier. As John McCormack says, “A top concern Senator Ted Cruz is that too many people will become ‘addicted’ to Obamacare’s subsidies after January 1. Ensuring the subsides aren’t going to people who aren’t eligible is in the interest of those who hope to repeal Obamacare.” And in the interest of people who don’t care much about O-Care one way or another but do care lots about good government! If Obama’s dead set on letting people rip his program off, let him defend that at the White House podium.

One other virtue of the anti-fraud demand: It might steer the public’s focus away from the shutdown and back to the problems with ObamaCare itself. Per recent polls, voters are indeed a bit distracted from the car crash that is Healthcare.gov by all the wrangling on the Hill. And even those who aren’t find themselves less annoyed by ObamaCare’s issues when the government has shut down over them. From Republican-leaning pollster Resurgent Republic:

Unfortunately in the context of a government shutdown, Obamacare is the lesser of two evils.

Unlike previous trends, Independents look more like Democrats than Republicans when it comes to partially shutting down the government in order to right the wrongs of Obamacare. Three-quarters of Independents join 86 percent of Democrats in disapproving of this action, according to a CBS News survey. More noteworthy, Republicans are split: 48 percent approval to 49 percent disapproval.

By 59 to 38 percent, even those who oppose Obamacare believe a partial government shutdown is not the way to go. A government shutdown divides Republicans and flips the anti-Obamacare coalition, which is why the shutdown stopped revolving around the health care law several days ago.

If you’re going to proceed with a shutdown in the name of attacking O-Care, attacking it for the Obama administration’s insistence on letting new enrollees rip off taxpayers is more fertile ground politically than digging in for a repeal of the medical device tax, which is as much a giveaway to business interests as delaying the employer mandate was. The question is, will the Senate GOP insist on including it as a demand? The whole reason they’re floating their own plan is because they’re fed up with the stalemate between Democrats and Boehner. They’re wading in here as the “reasonable” Republicans who are going to end the shutdown and raise the debt ceiling for a year in the name of getting all of this off the table. That being so, how likely is it that they’re going to drop the anti-fraud bomb on Obama and make him start sweating? Exit quotation from Bob Corker: “I think that we will have a solution to this. … I’d be surprised if it goes all the way to the 17th. I think sometime mid-week this will all be resolved, if not sooner, candidly.”

If you’re trying to access your Obamacare account on Healthcare.gov, you may be told your password needs to be reset.

“All passwords were deleted for existing accounts as part of the upgrade process,” a call center representative told CNN’s Elizabeth Cohen. The representative said users experiencing issues must call in to reset their password; it cannot be done online.

Representatives can be reached at 1-800-318-2596.

You can call in and tell your password to a clerk.

But don’t worry, your personal data is so secure that Seal Team 6 couldn’t get to it.

You know.. the Republicans should just demand ObamaCare be optional… like it is for congress.

Low info voters would get this. Make it optional. Stop being so mean Democrats… let people decide for themselves. Remove the nasty penalties, regulations and allow choice!

Let the mean Democrats and Obama argue how they have to make people take it!

Sometimes the argument is so simple people are blind to it.

JellyToast on October 11, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Can’t be optional or it will sink faster than Guam–wholly dependent on the young and healthy to distribute to the sick and dying. That’s why it is important to know the real number of enrollees who are being the wealth distributors. I guess 80% of those getting plans have pre-exist conditions–the takers of the system.

Or, more likely, Obama could say yes. “Sure Congress, we’ll enforce those Obamacare anti-fraud provisions, (wink, wink), just like we enforce laws prohibiting illegal aliens from receiving food stamps, and just like we enforce laws against illegal immigration, and just like we enforce laws against (white) voter intimidation . . . .”

We already know Obama is a liar, and that he feels free to pick and choose which laws, or which parts of laws, he is going to enforce, and which he is going to ignore. We also know congress doesn’t do a damn thing — except hold hearings and send “sternly worded letters” — when Obama violates the law. And Obama knows it too.

If you’re going to proceed with a shutdown in the name of attacking O-Care, attacking it for the Obama administration’s insistence on letting new enrollees rip off taxpayers is more fertile ground politically than digging in for a repeal of the medical device tax, which is as much a giveaway to business interests as delaying the employer mandate was.

Isn’t this kind of fraud already against the law, though? Are you saying it’s a good thing the Senate Republicans have basically decided on is to beg Obama to follow already-existing law? I don’t really see how, even if they pass some kind of legislation, Obama doesn’t just ignore it.

but a provision which his Keystone Kops Healthcare.gov team might simply not yet have the manpower or sophistication to enforce.

Might not? Do not. They’ve said they don’t have the ability to (read: don’t want to) enforce it, hence the “temporary” honor system.

So, that means that states who have bought into the Medicaid expansion are going to have to take new Medicaid enrollees on their honor because the FEDS didn’t bother to means test, even though means testing is part of the SACRED LAW OF OBAMACARE that Repubs aren’t allowed to touch, but parts of which Obama can at will decide not to enforce.

Surely there are lawsuits here just itching to be filed on behalf of the states. The Supremes were in their corner before on the Medicaid expansion.

It’s politically radioactive for the president to insist on blocking anti-fraud measures when the whole country’s watching

Obama-fluffers in the media will yap the following :
” Rich white Republicans want to kill poor black and brown chirren”
just like they do whenever someone wants to stop fraud in food-stamp and welfare payments to the parasites.
It’s always the po black and brown chirrun that will die if fraud doesn’t continue and the rich racist taxpayers don’t keep paying up .

Forget the fact that subsidies to those with incomes under 400% of the poverty level is a sure sign that the ACA is an entirely unrealistic proposition….

How the H*** do a certain class of citizens get a “subsidy” for healthcare, while those who are gainfully employed and have health care coverage as part of their compensation do not. If the mandate penalty is indeed a “tax”, this sets up a privileged class and sure sounds unconstitutional.

If the mandate penalty is indeed a “tax”, this sets up a privileged class and sure sounds unconstitutional.

can_con on October 11, 2013 at 5:07 PM

It is unconstitutional under the US Constitution,
but not under the jizya rule of the koran.
Jizya is what this whole [email protected] is built around, so Hussein will never back down or even slow down on it’s implementation.

Unlike the nascent House plan, it does demand that Obama concede something on ObamaCare that’s valuable to him — not a defunding or a delay but a provision which his Keystone Kops Healthcare.gov team might simply not yet have the manpower or sophistication to enforce.

It’s so cute when folks continue to give the benefit of the doubt when presuming – insanely – that Obama would actually abide by such a ‘demand’ even if he chose to accept it.

Obama’s not going to do a damn thing he doesn’t want to do – but the GOP could sure get the shutdown over by presenting him with a list of things he could agree to then simply neglect later, eh?

How do they do this? The provision is already there. It’s being ignored. Are they going to put a provision in the CR that says, “We really, really mean that other provision that is required by law. Really.”

well stoner you’ve denigrated the WWII generation and now their kids, what are you? millennial, gen-x, gen-y?

DanMan on October 11, 2013 at 5:16 PM

They should have paid their own bills. A $17T debt (even accepting the erroneous lowball stated value of the debt) is unconscionable. And, now that everyone is on the government teat, it is almost impossible to get them off. Easier to have never put them on it.

I’ve always been slightly confused about this. My understanding is that the IRS is responsible for assessing any penalty that falls on you for not purchasing your personal mandate. Can they not look one row over on the spreadsheet to see if your subsidiy level as determined by income matches your tax rate as determined by income?

This should be really really really easy to enforce at the same time taxes are filed unless there is some difficulty or hurdle I’m just not seeing.

What’s to stop him from agreeing to more anti-fraud provisions, and then instructing HHS bureaucrats to ignore those also?

Lawdawg86

Nothing. Heck, that little out will probably be part of Ron Johnson’s bill. But that’s not what’s important. What’s important is Ron Johnson and his fellow surrendercrats get to look like they accomplished something unlike those evil America hatin’, party destroying, wacko bird dumbazzes Ted Cruz and Mike Lee.

Do something 0bama will understand, apply Alynski’s Rules for Radicals: Make them play by their own rules. In other words, make them apply the law as written.

No waivers for anyone, no delays (the timetables were written in to the law, after all), no exceptions. Its. The. Law. The sooner this is revealed as a huge debacle, the better, and it will, without a doubt, collapse under it’s own weight. And they know it.

I’ve always been slightly confused about this. My understanding is that the IRS is responsible for assessing any penalty that falls on you for not purchasing your personal mandate. Can they not look one row over on the spreadsheet to see if your subsidiy level as determined by income matches your tax rate as determined by income?

This should be really really really easy to enforce at the same time taxes are filed unless there is some difficulty or hurdle I’m just not seeing.

dieudonne on October 11, 2013 at 5:23 PM

I, too, am confused. Is the subsidy throughout the year or at tax time?

Obama’s solution will be to accept it and not enforce it. DUH. NEXT RETARDED ARGUMENT.
astonerii on October 11, 2013 at 5:08 PM

HAHAHA, good one.

But seriously, IMHO, making improvements to the law and making it work will prevent a single payer system. Thats the best thing to do for the country since there is no chance of repealing it. SCOTUS made sure of that.

I’m tired of paying for people who refuse to get covered when they end up in the hospital anyway.

MAKE THE DANM THING WORK!!! There is no other alternative being presented and you wonder why it’s not even more unpopular. I which there was a plausible alternative, but there isn’t.

Thank God for the elected officials who don’t govern through hate. God bless them.

I, too, am confused. Is the subsidy throughout the year or at tax time?

cptacek on October 11, 2013 at 5:44 PM

It’s applied at the time of purchase. But that purchase info is being passed along somehow in order to lay a tax on you or not. A receipt of some sort with “I paid X dollars with Y subsidies” as proof of purchase to the IRS. If anyone in government can verify your income then surely it’s the IRS.

Corker and Alexander are my Senators, please accept my apologies America. Could it be worse? Yes, but these two d*ck heads will never get my vote again. I am also heading to the registrar’s office early Monday and changing my registration to Independent. Marsha Blackburn is my rep and I hate to abandon her, but two Senators trump one Rep.

Me thinks tis time to dial the wayback machine to 2008 when then candidate Obama promised to take a scalpel to the budget and delete item by item any waste and or fraud, rather than that hatchet McCain would have swung.

I’m tired of paying for people who refuse to get covered when they end up in the hospital anyway.

Lucky Pierre on October 11, 2013 at 5:55 PM

Knowing that the tax/fine on a person making $43K who doesn’t want or can’t afford insurance will only equal about $860 (vs. thousands in premiums and deductibles):

$860 will barely cover any actual medical procedure, and hospitals will still be required by law to provide care regardless of insurance coverage or ability to pay.

Tell use exactly how Obamacare does anything to change the free rider problem, please.

Give us specifics.

rogerb on October 11, 2013 at 6:07 PM

No change.

The free-rider problem that the democratics have shed gallons of crocodile tears over mostly affects illegal aliens and the homeless. Obamacare changes nothing wrt to that demo.

The way it is now, when a normal person checks into a hospital you sign scary-looking forms regarding your obligation to pay either: what your insurance company doesn’t pay ie deductibles etc, or, the full amount should you be uninsured. For what they are owed they will and do come after your paycheck, your bank accounts, and your home (in most states), and any other assets. They will also offer payment plans.

The law might say they must treat you, but it also gives them a right to come after you for the money.

If you are an illegal alien or homeless they can try but there’s probably nothing there to get.

well stoner you’ve denigrated the WWII generation and now their kids, what are you? millennial, gen-x, gen-y?

DanMan on October 11, 2013 at 5:16 PM

I put the blame where it belongs. I am early gen X if it really matters all that much.
The “Greatest” Generation gave us 4 terms of FDR, Social Security, the Supreme Court that allowed Social Security, Abortion, easy divorce, welfare state, the sexism that is in the welfare state, medicare and medicaid. “Greatest” Generation Ever, why? Because when they were attacked by a significantly inferior foe they fought back and won, they totally went against human nature there and did the unheard of. Thank God!

As long as we’re on the topic, what ever happened to that “litigation impact on healthcare” study we were promised in the roll-out speech? You know the one…the part where all the Dems sat down and went silent??? (it’s on YouTube). I’ll cut them a break and attribute it to that “post-climax phase” after everything said prior to that. Have to give them credit for their “rebound” time though…once that part was over, they were back having orgasims again.

You know.. the Republicans should just demand ObamaCare be optional… like it is for congress.

Low info voters would get this. Make it optional. Stop being so mean Democrats… let people decide for themselves. Remove the nasty penalties, regulations and allow choice!

Let the mean Democrats and Obama argue how they have to make people take it!

Sometimes the argument is so simple people are blind to it.

JellyToast on October 11, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Unfortunately there are regulations in Obamacare that affect all health care insurance plans. So all plans have been corrupted by it, and reflect much higher premiums and deductibles than in 2013. It is the coverage mandates that are driving up prices.

Price drivers: Pre-existing conditions, Children to age 26, Free birth control (abortion included), mandatory maternity care, preventive care (Which has been shown to be a waste of money and resources.).